Analysis Implementation of Bridge Resource Management The objective of Bridge Resource Management (BRM) is to ensure the safety of the ship, its personnel and cargo, and protection of the environment. BRM emphasizes teamwork to optimize the use of all available resources, including equipment, written information, procedures, and personnel. All members of the bridge watch team have a role to play, and for BRM to be effective, there must be clear channels of communication and an environment conducive to open discussions, especially during critical phases of a passage. Although the master and his bridge team had received training in BRM, they did not apply the related principles at the time the vessel approached buoys D56 and D57; the master was looking for the next range on which to steer. When the master sighted the white lights ahead, he made an assumption that he was looking at a new range installation. He did not immediately validate his observations with his bridge team who saw the same lights and interpreted them to be a vessel crossing ahead. This interpretation was confirmed by radar observation. The bridge team assumed that the master had reached the same interpretation as they had and did not communicate to him that the lights ahead were those of a crossing vessel. Although the roles of the evaluator and the trainee master were not clearly established in advance and they were not part of the bridge team or responsible for the vessel's navigation, in an effective BRM environment, they would have spoken out upon recognizing deviations from established practices affecting the vessel's safety. There is currently no mandatory requirement for BRM training. However, the owner is providing BRM training to officers and expects it to be used. An integral component of a company training program like BRM is validation of course objectives through noticeable change and improved practices. While masters and mates are evaluated by the company for their pilotage capabilities, less emphasis is placed on ensuring that the skill and knowledge acquired during BRM training is translated into enhanced navigation practices. Evaluating for Pilotage Compulsory pilotage areas are established to protect the environment from marine accidents and to enhance operational safety. Within these areas, a vessel must be under the conduct of a competent person. The determination of a person's competencies requires an appropriate evaluation of the person's abilities, knowledge, and skills. The success of an evaluation is determined by the knowledge and experience of the evaluator, the quality and nature of the evaluation criteria, and a process that is objective. To evaluate and verify the skills and knowledge of its masters and mates to safely navigate in the confined waters of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River system, Algoma Central Marine, the business unit which operates the dry-bulk cargo vessels, put into place a pilotage program for its vessels in May 2000. Algoma Central Marine evaluators have a train the trainer course for training other masters within the fleet to be evaluators. However, at the time of the occurrence, the owner did not have such a program in place for its liquid-bulk vessels, which included the Algoeast. In the absence of evaluation criteria, an evaluation carried out by a subject matter expert is susceptible to subjectivity, value judgement, and error.4 Algoma Central Marine's pilotage program for dry bulk cargo vessels primarily addresses evaluating the knowledge of its employees. Evaluating job behaviour is based on only one subjective question, Did the team adequately apply BRM? In the context of pilotage, delegation, teamwork, decision making, and communications are essential factors; evaluation criteria should address these aspects separately. It is relatively easy to evaluate skills and knowledge by assessing answers to specific questions and examining discrete tasks which can be measured directly, for example, which radio frequency is to be used in a specific location. However, it is much more difficult to assess tasks which are of a team nature or those requiring interaction with others. This may be more subjective in nature and requires an evaluator who is conversant with the subject matter and criteria which can be used to assess overall job behaviour. Reporting an Accident The benefit of having vessels maintain a continuous listening watch on a common radiotelephone channel when operating in confined waters is to allow vessel crews to become immediately aware of circumstances where it may be necessary for them to take early action. This occurrence was reported to a marine traffic regulator by cellular telephone rather than by VHF radio. While there are no regulations requiring that such a report be made by VHF radio, use of a cellular telephone to report an accident effectively pre-empts other vessels of the opportunity to take immediate precautionary measures. Accuracy of Electronic Positioning From the data log files, the TSB was able to evaluate the accuracy of the position from the GPS data in real-time with differential corrections. While transiting the Amherstburg Channel, no major system malfunctions were recorded by the electronic chart system, and past track data was logged without interruption at the set 10-second intervals. At the time of the occurrence, the positioning information provided by the GPS receiver was considered accurate. The master, initially, did not interpret the lights he saw as those of a vessel crossing ahead and delayed his helm order to port. Consequently, the vessel made contact with the bottom while outside the deep-draught portion of the channel. Although most of the navigating personnel had received BRM training, BRM principles were not applied on the vessel at the time of the occurrence.Findings as to Causes and Contributing Factors The master, initially, did not interpret the lights he saw as those of a vessel crossing ahead and delayed his helm order to port. Consequently, the vessel made contact with the bottom while outside the deep-draught portion of the channel. Although most of the navigating personnel had received BRM training, BRM principles were not applied on the vessel at the time of the occurrence. The current exemption for vessels does not require an assessment of the pilotage skills of masters and navigation officers. The absence of evaluation criteria for pilotage skills increases the risk of a subjective evaluation and an inaccurate assessment. The current practice of not evaluating the shipboard personnel in the implementation of BRM practices has the potential to compromise the safe navigation of vessels. There was no formal follow-up evaluation of the training to ensure that BRM principles were integrated into daily operations. Use of a cellular telephone to report an accident prevents other vessels from the opportunity to take immediate precautionary measures.Findings as to Risk The current exemption for vessels does not require an assessment of the pilotage skills of masters and navigation officers. The absence of evaluation criteria for pilotage skills increases the risk of a subjective evaluation and an inaccurate assessment. The current practice of not evaluating the shipboard personnel in the implementation of BRM practices has the potential to compromise the safe navigation of vessels. There was no formal follow-up evaluation of the training to ensure that BRM principles were integrated into daily operations. Use of a cellular telephone to report an accident prevents other vessels from the opportunity to take immediate precautionary measures. Safety Action Action Taken by Algoma Central Marine On 31 August 2000, the owner adopted and implemented the Algoma Central Marine Pilotage Program for its liquid-bulk vessels. A directive was issued to vessels stating that BRM principles are to be exercised regardless of the situation. It is proposed that an evaluator will be issued written instructions stating his objectives and that he is part of the bridge team.